What Does This Mean for Everyone?

In a manner reminiscent of a Black Mirror episode (yes, even time travelers indulge in Netflix!), society in 2030 will be judged not by social media metrics but by a singular score. Initially, this scoring system evaluated individuals based on:

• Credit ratings
• Driving records (companies like Allstate are already collecting this data; opting out is advisable)
• Public income records
• Overall financial worth
• Educational achievements (higher scores for college graduates)
• Criminal history (easily accessible via platforms like Truthfinder)
• Health data (recently integrated by companies like 23andMe; consider avoiding trendy DNA tests)

As the system evolved, it began to incorporate more ambiguous criteria, such as:

• Social circles and friendships
• Volunteer hours
• Physical appearance and overall attractiveness
• Higher scores associated with partners or spouses of higher standing
• Wealthier individuals generally receiving higher scores
• Your likability quotient, gauged through ratings on services like Uber and Doordash
• Opinions from colleagues regarding your work ethic

How Scoring Works:

I currently hold a score of 7.4 out of 10. Due to my profession, certain aspects of my score are elevated by my superiors. If my score drops below 6, I would lose access to the social circles and venues I frequent.

My Scorecard:

I possess a digital scorecard on my smartphone, which fluctuates daily based on my interactions. For privacy and security reasons, some details have been omitted.

This System Already Exists

The concept is not as far-fetched as it seems; a similar system has been in place in China since 2022. This "Social Credit" system, as it's known, implements a moral ranking for its populace.

The Chinese Communist Party has been developing this moral ranking system for years, aiming to monitor and evaluate the behavior of its vast population. This initiative, introduced in 2014, is a crucial element of the Socialist market economy, promoting the idea that "keeping trust is glorious, while breaking trust is disgraceful," according to a 2015 government document.

While the program has been piloted nationwide, it remains fragmented and voluntary. Local governments have been experimenting with various implementations of the system. The score fluctuates according to individual behavior, including:

• Reckless driving
• Smoking in prohibited areas
• Excessive spending on video games
• Spreading misinformation online, especially regarding terrorism or airport security
• Wasteful expenditures on trivial items
• Social media activity

When It Rolled Out in 2028 in the U.S…

When introduced in the U.S. as "LifeJump," it was marketed as a trendy means to excel in life. Early adopters quickly became wealthy and famous, prompting many to eagerly join, signing long-term contracts that tethered them to the program.

And It Doesn't Stop There…

The LifeJump scoring system has restricted many from improving their lives, and we now live in a cashless society. A few holdouts resist this trend, but the majority of Generation Z and Generation Alpha have embraced it.

My grandparents taught me that "cash is king." The evolution of currency in the United States has a rich history:

• In its early days, the U.S. relied on foreign coins and private banknotes.
• The First Bank of the United States was established in 1791, issuing its own notes.
• The Coinage Act of 1792 formed the U.S. Mint and set regulations for coinage.
• National banks emerged after the National Banking Act of 1863, allowing them to issue National Bank Notes backed by U.S. government bonds.
• The Civil War saw the introduction of "greenbacks," fiat currency not backed by gold or silver, leading to debates about returning to the gold standard.
• In 1873, the U.S. officially adopted the gold standard, linking the dollar’s value to gold.

Years later, my grandparents would be astonished by our current society, particularly regarding the use of debit cards for even minor purchases, such as a $2 soda from a vending machine. While cash may be cumbersome, it remains legal tender in the United States.

Why Is This a Trend?

According to The Takeout, fast-food giants like Taco Bell and KFC are adopting cashless operations for several reasons:

• Debit cards encourage impulsive buying as they don’t feel like real money.
• Going cashless allows for automated ordering through screens, websites, and apps, diminishing the need for cashiers.
• It is believed to reduce crime by limiting cash transactions.

Despite the ease of cashless payments, we oppose forcing customers into a cashless environment. Denying service based solely on digital transactions alienates those who can only use cash, including the undocumented and the unhoused.

Fast-food establishments have been attempting to eliminate cash for years. Restaurant operators argue that cashless transactions streamline operations. Celia Zhang, vice president of business development at Fuku, mentioned that going cashless saves employees from handling cash transactions, while chef-owner Nelson German noted a reduction in transaction times.

Why Are Cashless Restaurants Discriminatory?

As reported by Eater, cashless dining options tend to favor wealthier patrons. Restaurateurs often cater to a specific demographic: urban, upper-middle-class diners with disposable income and multiple credit cards. This is surprising, particularly for advocates of equitable pay for staff, as seen in Danny Meyer’s Shake Shack, which has introduced cashless locations.

Cashless restaurants disproportionately impact lower-income individuals or those lacking bank accounts. Many of these individuals rely on payday loans or check-cashing services. Not accepting cash creates an exclusionary environment that can be classified as discriminatory.

Public officials are taking notice. Chicago Alderman Ed Burke raised concerns about the implications for those unable to access credit or debit cards, advocating against cashless policies.

Dearest, I am relieved you do not inhabit this timeline. The daily judgment based on a numerical score is emotionally and financially detrimental, stripping away elements of humanity from life. Yet, this is the price of technological "advancements."

Always,

Thomas